Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 148
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516

    MBA's review of 26 vs 27.5 vs 29ers

    Totally sh1ting on the 29er now! Now its the up and coming 27.5 thats the king of the mountain, with 26 in second and our beloved 29ers falling short in every category (climbing, corning, and descending)! Funny how the marketing "new" products thing works!
    Last edited by dogo; 05-26-2012 at 11:55 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TwoNin9r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,691
    i'm interested to give this b wheel thing a try. i'm 6'3" so i feel like proportionately a 29er bike would feel the same to me as a B or 26er to someone else but i do notice a bit of sluggish cornering with the 29ers i've ridden.

    could be a "happy medium" type dealy

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    I understand completely wanted to try something new, shoot thats the reason why i bought my 29er. I also understand not every wheel size is going to fit everyone, hence the 29er being better suited for larger folk, but cmon the way they pooped on 29ers in the review was hard to swallow..

  4. #4
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,205
    When did Mountain Bike Fiction become relevant?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5
    Great thread...I'm excited to see where it goes.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by AZ.MTNS View Post
    When did Mountain Bike Fiction become relevant?
    I agree, it's just the total marlarkey of pushing a new product thats bothersome.. I know when 29ers first hit the scene there was a market push, but 3inchs is a lot out on the trail.. Is +/- 1.5 really going to be that ground braking?? Please correct me if I'm wrong..
    Last edited by dogo; 05-26-2012 at 04:05 PM.

  7. #7
    TR
    TR is offline
    Angry bunny
    Reputation: TR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,879
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    I agree, it's just the total marlarkey of pushing a new product thats bothersome.. I know when 29ers first hit the scene there was a market push, but 3inchs is a lot of the trail.. Is +/- 1.5 really going to be that ground braking?? Please correct me if I'm wrong..
    Not even a new product.
    650B has been round for ages.
    Seriously I REALLY dont get it.
    All these people suddenly "discovering" 650B??
    The concept has been around for about the same amount of time as 29ers and has basically been ignored.
    In all that time they still have bugger all tyre and rim choice, not to mention fork choice.
    I dont get why it is suddenly "awesome".

    It is plain and simple hype. Just like the hype around 26ers, 29ers, 650B, through axles, tapered steerers etc etc etc being better.

    As I said elsewhere you can hype it anyway you like.
    You could say that it has all of the benefits of each and none of the downside.
    OR as I prefer to think of it,
    you could say they have all of the downsides of each and none of the upside.

    I also think that there are some bike companies who simply dont want to do the R&D on the 29er platform and see the ability to possibly squeeze in some 650B wheels into their existing frames as the next best option.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    341
    I think I just need to own at least one of each and come to my own conclusion. :-)

  9. #9
    conjoinicorned
    Reputation: ferday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,527
    it was only a couple issues ago they were calling for the death of the 26er hardtail and praising 29er trail bikes. still a fun read though, just don't take it seriously
    what would rainbow unicorn do?

  10. #10
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,092
    No no no, they have it all wrong. . . Twenty EIGHT in front, 26.7225 in the back, that's the optimal. it's called a sixty seventy eighty'r

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by charmon2 View Post
    I think I just need to own at least one of each and come to my own conclusion. :-)
    Exactly how they want you to think! I agree with TR completely. All it is, is a big push to sell bikes!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by ferday View Post
    it was only a couple issues ago they were calling for the death of the 26er hardtail and praising 29er trail bikes. still a fun read though, just don't take it seriously
    So I should read it like I read the huffington post!?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vizsladog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,320
    Remember when they said "stick a fork in them there done" about 29ers??

    Really,this magazine is getting to be the biggest pile of crap there is.

    last year they stested a speci camber and twice in the article they explained how they ran less psi in the neg chamber on the rockshox fork on the bike to get a better ride.

    To bad the bike clearly had a recon tk single air fork on it.

  14. #14
    mnoutain bkie rdier
    Reputation: rydbyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,822
    MBA? Did they say it is between how a 26 and a 29 feels? I feel confident that some of their writers do not ride bikes.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,192
    Having owned several 29er's "not for me" still find 26er's best for my needs, and ridden a few 650b,I'm totally sold on them,gain everything lose nothing! with the industry gearing up for them it should be interesting to see how it will stack up overall in comparison to most bikers needs!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    Exactly how they want you to think! I agree with TR completely. All it is, is a big push to sell bikes!
    Indeed. And I do fall for it from time to time but it definitely doesn't take a magazine article to make me want to try something different. Just knowing that there is something different is enough. I don't buy stuff just because some stranger with different opinions, riding a trail that I will probably never set a tire on, says something is better than another. But for me, part of the fun of this sport is the hardware. In over two decades of riding I've seen a lot of new technologies come and go. I enjoy reading about it and most of all trying it because that means I am on the trails. 26", 27.5", 29"...I just like riding bikes. I've even been caught trying to ride my kid's 12" bike just to see if I can, doesn't matter to me!

  17. #17
    I like turtles
    Reputation: TiGeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,678
    I want to try a "Killer B"...it may be great...we won't know until we try it. Love my 29er...but again, you don't know what you are missing until you try it. I think having the different sizes is great; it has re-invigorated the MTB industry and makes things exciting again. Also realize that the shoot-out was on FS...this has always been the bain of 29er-dom..and maybe 650b really is the better way to go for longer travel FS.

    On another note, they really did crap all over 29ers like they are hogs that you can't handle. Give me a break.
    Geologist by trade...bicycle mechanic (former) by the grace of God!

    2012 Specialized Stumpy EVO 29 HT

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    I agree, it's just the total marlarkey of pushing a new product thats bothersome.. I know when 29ers first hit the scene there was a market push, but 3inchs is a lot out on the trail.. Is +/- 1.5 really going to be that ground braking?? Please correct me if I'm wrong..
    +1.

    The only reason I see for the smaller wheels would be for f/s. The more suspension the smaller the wheels unless you want to end up on a really "big" bike. That said, I've never tried a 29er f/s and many people seem really satisfied.

    Do we need 3 sizes? Or I suppose 4 with 36ers?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by TiGeo View Post

    On another note, they really did crap all over 29ers like they are hogs that you can't handle. Give me a break.

    Hey I'm up for trying new things myself, but to sh1t on one to push another, when they've praised 29ers numerous times before is B.S..

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,453
    Simply doesn't make any sense.

    The theory is that the bigger wheels smooth out the trail and add climbing traction and stability and now want to hype up a smaller wheel.Are we really that naive?

    I am done with 26 but not jumping on a 27.5 anytime soon.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    60
    Was it just me or was anyone else annoyed with the lack of disclaimers about the extremely limited scope of the 'test'. The conclusion they came to seems no more profound than that among the KHS full-suspension rigs they were testing, those testers liked the 650B the best compared to the KHS 26er and the KHS 29er, on the trails they were riding them on. I think the unfortunate part is that some readers will take their conclusions as definitive about wheel size.

    I will stipulate that the article peaked my interest in 650B enough to at least try one. My guess is that the wheels will feel small...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,640
    It's okay to sell lots and lots of bikes.

  23. #23
    EXORCIZE
    Reputation: Ryder1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,642
    Having let my MBA subscription lapse years ago, I'm no fan. But I've been waiting/hoping for a nice crop of 650b FS bikes to become available. I've owned 26 HT, 26FS, 29HT, 29 soft-tail, and 29 FS, and currently think 650b would make the best FS for me and my trails.
    2016 Pivot Mach 429 Trail
    2011 Kona Unit

  24. #24
    Rohloff
    Reputation: bsdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,593
    If 27.5 and 26 are the top two ... hmm ... Makes you wonder how good a 26.75 wheel would be. Best of both worlds, you know. I hope someone gets on that quick.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pascale27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    479
    Quote Originally Posted by TiGeo View Post
    I want to try a "Killer B"...it may be great...we won't know until we try it. Love my 29er...but again, you don't know what you are missing until you try it. I think having the different sizes is great; it has re-invigorated the MTB industry and makes things exciting again. Also realize that the shoot-out was on FS...this has always been the bain of 29er-dom..and maybe 650b really is the better way to go for longer travel FS.

    On another note, they really did crap all over 29ers like they are hogs that you can't handle. Give me a break.
    I would defiantely love to try a 650 FS bike,hell if I could squeeze a 650 ont he front of my Top Fuel I'd do it. 650 FS is where I think this wheel size could shine. But I'm not selling my 29er anytime soon. Definately cool to have different wheels sizes, just like the camber vs rocker debate in snowboarding....then the combo rocker boards came along
    Misfit diSSent 1x10
    Jet 9

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    I guess after this, the next push will be 650b in the rear, 29 in the front! Everything else will be obsolete!

  27. #27
    --Raleigh--
    Reputation: iMongoose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    90
    nice read for sure but ill keep my 29er :-)
    K2 Zed V
    Kona Unit
    Both single speed 26ers

  28. #28
    mnoutain bkie rdier
    Reputation: rydbyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by bsdc View Post
    If 27.5 and 26 are the top two ... hmm ... Makes you wonder how good a 26.75 wheel would be. Best of both worlds, you know. I hope someone gets on that quick.
    Thanks for making me laugh Then it will be between 26 and 26.75. I am gonna get on it and make a 26.38er. Everyone will love it cause it will be between...right..

  29. #29
    ~ B A D A S S ~
    Reputation: car bone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,081
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    I agree, it's just the total marlarkey of pushing a new product thats bothersome.. I know when 29ers first hit the scene there was a market push, but 3inchs is a lot out on the trail.. Is +/- 1.5 really going to be that ground braking?? Please correct me if I'm wrong..
    As far as I know 29ers are not nearly as new as some people think it is, this is actually called 28 in europe and has been the most common size by far for like 50 years, with most tires being in the 35-50mm range or so.
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.

    Quote Originally Posted by iheartbicycles View Post
    Specialized sucks ass.

  30. #30
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    582
    I'll just stick to my 29er.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PoisonDartFrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    3inchs is a lot out on the trail..
    That's what she said...
    Mind your own religion.

  32. #32
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,730
    The 650B bike sounds awesome. They have been around a long time but with compromises. It sounds like forks are being made for 650B from the big boys not White Brother's junk. I find the 29er fun but a bit big in many riding conditions and the 26" small in many riding conditions.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PoisonDartFrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    656
    I read that article a month or so ago... if my memory serves, the 29er came in second overall, not 3rd?

    In any case, it's a tempest in a teapot, IMO. Who cares? 650b may eventually gain traction, but now is not the right time - the market JUST made the swing to 29ers, with hold-out skeptics like Yeti and Specialized finally giving in to market demands. No one really WANTS another change right now.

    Plus, I am skeptical that 650b offers ENOUGH of a difference to entice the average rider to switch - again. That's the lure of the 29er - it was the biggest change since the inception of the sport, and the move from 26 to 29er was big enough that even average/rec riders could tell a difference. I am not certain that is true with 650b - its only a ~5% difference over 26.

    So, in summary, 650b is late to market, has few adopters, and it doesn't offer enough of an advantage over either 26 or 29 to entice riders to make a switch.

    PS/Edit: In my experience, more attention must be given to selecting quality wheelsets and tires when riding 29ers. The added size obviously means added weight, so simply scaling up a 26er wheel and tire set to 29 doesn't always work - the same tire and wheelset that feels fine in 26 can feel sluggish and heavy in 29.

    The more attention (and $$) you spend on the 29er wheels and tires goes a long way to closing the perceived "nimbleness" gap.
    Mind your own religion.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,192
    Really,there is no"superiority" of one over another in wheel size,it really is all about what riding discipline you mostly ride and enjoy,terrain etc.a skilled and multi disciplined rider can truly ride any wheel size with great results,but having a wheel size that is more apropo for terrain and style just makes the ride that more blissfull!

  35. #35
    Old Punk
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    529
    The more sizes available for the consumer to choose from, the better. But this debate is a dead hoarse that just keeps getting beat......unmercifully!

    I wish that the mags would stop wasting my subscription $ on the ink it takes to print these "side by side by side" articles. OLD NEWS!

    On an unrelated, but equally old and pointless note.
    Who's hotter, Lonnie Anderson, Christie Brinkley or Cheryl Tiegs?
    '09 Specialized Rockhopper expert 29
    Born 26" trials
    '07 Specialized Allez

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by PoisonDartFrog View Post
    I read that article a month or so ago... if my memory serves, the 29er came in second overall, not 3rd?

    No its July's issue, and came in third.. I bought the subscription only because its 8.99 a year on the Ipad. Not bad for when I'm taking a dump and need something to read.....

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: d365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,677
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    I guess after this, the next push will be 650b in the rear, 29 in the front! Everything else will be obsolete!
    This is what I want.

  38. #38
    Birthday Collector
    Reputation: ATBScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,579
    Mountain Bike Enquirer is the "Ooohhh - bright colors!" publication of our sport. The writing is bad, the opinion changes monthly, and they rarely give a really conclusive review of a product, destination, or 'riding tips'. (but some of the faces the riders in action shots make are pretty amusing...) I wouldn't pay too much attention to what they say - ride a 650b yourself if you are interested. If a company does a good job designing a bike around that wheel size, and it is equipped with good components, there's a fairly good chance that it will be a nice riding bike - probably at least as good as the 26" model. It might be better in some places than a 29", and worse in others. While I love my 29" bikes, I can see how some people prefer 26" and really, does it have to be a competition about everything? Ride what you like and have a good time.
    R.I.P. Corky 10/97-4/09
    Disclaimer: I sell and repair bikes for a living
    http://www.endlesscyclesonline.com

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    271
    650b. Right. Obviously. Really?
    Amazing how dumb people are when it comes to marketing.
    The first casualty of a war is the truth. That has been so from the ages of Sun Tsu and before. See marketing as a type of media war.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: modifier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,810
    I'm not standing up for Mtba but anyone who hasn't ridden 650 for more than one test ride (or not at all) really shouldn't make any comments at all on stuff like this.

    If you ride the same model tire, the same width, 26 vs 650, the 650 performs slightly better. Slightly because it is slightly bigger. But it's not imaginary. If it's rough and rocky a 2.5 26er with big knobs will out perform a 2.35 650 and in that size comparison the diameter is almost the same. But you sacrifice a bit of rolling resistance and some extra weight, so if you like smooth swoopy trails 650 would be your tire. But then I don't think a light weight 29er setup wouldn't slow you down either.

    I don't have a lot of time on 29ers yet (I have one in the works) so I can't offer a fully tested conclusion, however so far my seat time on 29ers has been positive and my personal vote for one bike for all conditions would be a long travel 29er. But I have quite a few bikes and like switching back and forth between them to get a different riding experience and test out new ideas.

    As far as 650 vs 26? I'd take 650 if we had more choices, which hopefully we will in the future.
    No it never stops hurting, but if you keep at it you can go faster.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    I'm not standing up for Mtba but anyone who hasn't ridden 650 for more than one test ride (or not at all) really shouldn't make any comments at all on stuff like this.
    I don't agree, and this happens with everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    I don't have a lot of time on 29ers yet (I have one in the works) so I can't offer a fully tested conclusion, however so far my seat time on 29ers has been positive and my personal vote for one bike for all conditions would be a long travel 29er.
    So you can see how riding 29ers gives you an idea of the value of 650b and invalidates your comment above.

    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    As far as 650 vs 26? I'd take 650 if we had more choices, which hopefully we will in the future.
    But that isn't the choice, it's only one of the choices and it's artificial. 650b was done because it was cheap and easy. It allows some of the big wheel benefit of 29ers while working with much of the 26er frame selection. It's the poor man's choice. Saying 650b would be your choice is like saying you'd take Wendy's over McDonalds when you are looking for fine dining. I'd take it too but I'd prefer something else.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    565
    IIRC the other comparo they did was "sponsored" by Jamis, who sponsored this one?

    MBA at least has good pictures. Still not a monthly staple at mi casa though.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by dogo View Post
    No its July's issue, and came in third.. I bought the subscription only because its 8.99 a year on the Ipad. Not bad for when I'm taking a dump and need something to read.....

    Here are the results copy and pasted right from MBA....

    Win: This 27.5-inch-wheeled bike proved to be the most versatile of the three hardtails. It did an excellent job of blending the best traits of the 29er and 26er with- out ever feeling like a compromise between the two. This bike scampered away from the 29er on steep uphills or after a speed-zapping mistake. It then gapped the 26er on the other side of the mountain on the way down—all the while delivering a very resilient ride that didn’t beat up the rider.

    Place: This 29er couldn’t match the 27.5 in a drag race from a standstill or up a steep ascent. If your riding is wide-open trails with few surprises, the large wheels will hold an advantage over the 27.5. Our 29er held a slight advantage on the descents over the 27.5 (and blew the 26er into the weeds), but the advantage was less than what the 27.5 could throw down going up.

    Show: This 26er felt the lightest of the group (it was), and, in experienced hands, it would beat the other two in acceleration and slicing up or down a trail. It propelled its rider with pumpatude power and liked to manual, wheelie and hop around obstacles. The operative word here is “experienced.” An accomplished rider can pump and manual all day long. The rider who can’t do those things won’t have as much fun on this 26er as he would on either of the other bikes.

    Either way...I would say whatever works for the individual rider is the best wheel choice.....It's pretty much as simple as that..

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    17
    MBA did a 26 vs 29 test in jan with cannondale and they picked the 29 as the clear winner then . Maybe they are looking for more sales.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reformed roadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by TR View Post
    Not even a new product.
    650B has been round for ages.
    Seriously I REALLY dont get it.
    All these people suddenly "discovering" 650B??
    The concept has been around for about the same amount of time as 29ers and has basically been ignored.
    In all that time they still have bugger all tyre and rim choice, not to mention fork choice.
    I dont get why it is suddenly "awesome".

    It is plain and simple hype. Just like the hype around 26ers, 29ers, 650B, through axles, tapered steerers etc etc etc being better.
    Is that how the likes of Gary Fisher. Wes Williams, et al. "discovered" 29er wheels?
    Funny how they are the same size rim as my road bike. :roll eyes:

    It is clear that you never have ridden a 650b bike, and thus, have zero credibility. A fact re-enforced by you dismissing through axles being an improvement.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: modifier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    I don't agree, and this happens with everything.


    So you can see how riding 29ers gives you an idea of the value of 650b and invalidates your comment above.


    But that isn't the choice, it's only one of the choices and it's artificial. 650b was done because it was cheap and easy. It allows some of the big wheel benefit of 29ers while working with much of the 26er frame selection. It's the poor man's choice. Saying 650b would be your choice is like saying you'd take Wendy's over McDonalds when you are looking for fine dining. I'd take it too but I'd prefer something else.
    [I don't feel like copying and pasting all my comments so just go up a couple of posts to get up to speed.]

    First off I say you have to ride it to comment because I was of the opinion that 650 made no sense since it was only a little bit bigger and when I built a 650 wheel a couple of years ago and replaced a 2.5 26" front tire on a SS with it I didn't see much of an advantage either. But then this winter I spent 3 months on one bike at one trail system and about 1 month in I built up a 650 front wheel for that bike using Navegal 2.35 tires on both wheels and saw a notable improvement across the board in all conditions. So I personally saw the errors of my ways in judging before I fully tested and in a more applicable way using same tires and same width.

    Lastly what are you saying and are you channeling David Copperfield , that 29er is the only "real" choice? He calls 650 "kiddy wheels" rather than "cheap and easy", I think because he experienced the size when he was a kid. I'm not sure what is any "cheaper" or "easier" about 650 either except up to a certain size some 26er frames and forks work to a degree.

    I'm building a 29er DH frame and while the 2.5 Dessents look good and will probably be great on rough DH sections I think the wheels will be too heavy for AM riding, where a 26 2.5 Dessent Race is doable and offers amazing grip, shock absorption and traction both dry and wet. I have the tires and have built the wheels and they are heavy, but I haven't ridden them yet. Other 29er tires on the market are pretty wimpy. Also my FS fat bike that I built with 4" tires works better than anything else in most conditions unless you need to turn really fast like in a DH race and need to carve, or climb a long steep hill fast because the bike is 38lbs.

    So in conclusion my testing has shown that larger diameter and a fatter carcase are good, and big knobs are good, but too much of a good thing can be bad as is too heavy.

    So what I'm thinking is an in between tire might be the best overall and have started the ball rolling on trying to get some 650B 3.25 tires built, if I can get them in at around the 1200g mark and close to 29" in diameter. I think we (all mountain riders) could benefit from a 650 2.6 and 2.8 size too. Ultimately all in double casing steel bead and single high TPI casing folding bead versions.

    I don't know what you ride or what you build or where you live so it's hard to tell where you are coming from. If you prototype and build new things that work better I'll listen harder. If you are speaking purely theoretically then go test some stuff for a few years and report back.
    No it never stops hurting, but if you keep at it you can go faster.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    First off I say you have to ride it to comment because I was of the opinion that 650 made no sense since it was only a little bit bigger and when I built a 650 wheel a couple of years ago and replaced a 2.5 26" front tire on a SS with it I didn't see much of an advantage either. But then this winter I spent 3 months on one bike at one trail system and about 1 month in I built up a 650 front wheel for that bike using Navegal 2.35 tires on both wheels and saw a notable improvement across the board in all conditions. So I personally saw the errors of my ways in judging before I fully tested and in a more applicable way using same tires and same width.
    Yes, but two things. First, you are changing multiple things and then attributing a difference to the wheel diameter. You are free to judge the bike, but you can't just attribute the differences to 25mm of extra wheel size. It's what makes wheel size arguments silly.

    Second, you can have a good idea what to expect for a component based on experience with other components. We do it all the time. Frankly, it's a better reason to comment than many have.

    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    Lastly what are you saying and are you channeling David Copperfield , that 29er is the only "real" choice?
    I am deeply offended. Take that back.

    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    He calls 650 "kiddy wheels" rather than "cheap and easy", I think because he experienced the size when he was a kid. I'm not sure what is any cheaper or easier about 650 either except up to a certain size some 26er frames and forks work to a degree.
    I'm not calling 650b products cheap and easy, I'm calling the process of getting 650b adopted cheap and easy. When the industry was only 26er, 29ers required all new frames and forks besides the wheels. 650b didn't. That's really the core backstory of 650b, and now the apparent surge of 650b interest seems founded in a fear of manufacturers missing the boat (again). It seems clear that there will be a big upturn in 650b parts soon, but that doesn't lead me to believe that 650b is desirable or will be successful. The market isn't always a meritocracy either.

    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    I don't know what you ride or what you build or where you live so it's hard to tell where you are coming from. If you prototype and build new things that work better I'll listen harder. If you are speaking purely theoretically then go test some stuff for a few years and report back.
    Nor do I know yours or anyone else's. You can choose to listen or not and we all do, but you can consider everyone's comments on their merit alone. I rarely post my actual riding experiences because I prefer not to offer subjective comments most of the time. For objective issues my personal ride doesn't matter.

    I will say that I dislike both fat tires and Nevegals, and have ridden both, but that you like them doesn't make me disrepect your opinions. Believe it or not, I do have experience with 650b, I just don't like having to present my credentials. At risk of going severely off-topic, I recently took delivery of a full custom FS bike for which I designed the rear suspension myself. I won't be discussing it on MTBR because it is too far off what people do here, but just because I don't discuss my experimentation doesn't mean I don't do any.

  48. #48
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,791
    I thought there was a recent ban on these ridiculous "29er vs. X" threads... guess it expired.

    MBA is a joke and has been for a long time.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: modifier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Yes, but two things. First, you are changing multiple things and then attributing a difference to the wheel diameter. You are free to judge the bike, but you can't just attribute the differences to 25mm of extra wheel size. It's what makes wheel size arguments silly.

    Second, you can have a good idea what to expect for a component based on experience with other components. We do it all the time. Frankly, it's a better reason to comment than many have.


    I am deeply offended. Take that back.


    I'm not calling 650b products cheap and easy, I'm calling the process of getting 650b adopted cheap and easy. When the industry was only 26er, 29ers required all new frames and forks besides the wheels. 650b didn't. That's really the core backstory of 650b, and now the apparent surge of 650b interest seems founded in a fear of manufacturers missing the boat (again). It seems clear that there will be a big upturn in 650b parts soon, but that doesn't lead me to believe that 650b is desirable or will be successful. The market isn't always a meritocracy either.


    Nor do I know yours or anyone else's. You can choose to listen or not and we all do, but you can consider everyone's comments on their merit alone. I rarely post my actual riding experiences because I prefer not to offer subjective comments most of the time. For objective issues my personal ride doesn't matter.

    I will say that I dislike both fat tires and Nevegals, and have ridden both, but that you like them doesn't make me disrepect your opinions. Believe it or not, I do have experience with 650b, I just don't like having to present my credentials. At risk of going severely off-topic, I recently took delivery of a full custom FS bike for which I designed the rear suspension myself. I won't be discussing it on MTBR because it is too far off what people do here, but just because I don't discuss my experimentation doesn't mean I don't do any.
    Noted on all comments.

    The only thing that changed when I installed a 650 on the last bike (front only) was a slight change in geometry due to the larger diameter but I don't think the extra cornering traction or roll over ability could solely be attributed to geometry.

    I'm not saying 650 is "the answer". I am saying that it should be developed along with further advancements of wagon wheels and not abandoned and purely a marketing ploy.

    I've had several long conversations with Kirk Pancenti and he does not strike me as someone who would do something simply for monetary gain. Besides monetary gain for someone like him or me is going to be pretty minimal anyhow. It's only the big boys who ride on the coat tails of the little guys with things like this who make the bucks. Look at Keith Bontrager. He was ready to throw in the towel and get a non bike day job before Trek pulled him in. Not that he made huge leaps in technology but he's not a dumb guy by any means from reports from people who know him.

    Good to hear that you experiment Maybe we can talk off forum about suspension since I have a rear suspension design I've been wanting to build as well. It's somewhat out there so....

    And btw, suspension is the key to fat tires working in rough terrain. Otherwise you have an undampened spring to contend with.
    No it never stops hurting, but if you keep at it you can go faster.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reformed roadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by modifier View Post
    I've had several long conversations with Kirk Pancenti and he does not strike me as someone who would do something simply for monetary gain. Besides monetary gain for someone like him or me is going to be pretty minimal anyhow.
    I bet when KP was sewing together that first 650b tire he was thinking "boy I'm going to be rich!"

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •